martin-t

9 ms·

121.
by martin-t 7mo ago
No, you're the dishonest one. The only bullet point a reasonable person might disagree with it "99.9999%". The rest is true. - Many real devs criticize "AI". Documented: https://bsky.app/profile&#x2F
122.
by martin-t 7mo ago
I thought I had deja vu when reading your comment so I searched and found that you wrote something very similar 6 years ago, then 4 months ago and then 3 comments within the last month. Out of curiosity and without meaning it to sound like
123.
by martin-t 7mo ago
1) Yes but in those cases what their authors are gaining is at best some public recognition, not money. And because the projects don't hide what they're based on, that recognition goes back to the original games and their authors.
124.
by martin-t 7mo ago
And that's why human work, not its "expression" or some other legalese should be protected by law. If LLMs (or other "AI" or even AI tools) are able to exactly replicate the behavior of a program (game or otherwise)
125.
by martin-t 7mo ago
Yes but not every dev is an Amazon coder. I have the privilege of working for a robotics company small enough that I (a SW dev) can walk a few doors down the hallway and talk to anyone from mechanics, to electronics, to sales, to the people
126.
by martin-t 7mo ago
> How is it different now? Most cases, it was either: a) a new technology unrelated to the original job, which made the job redundant - the printing press was not made by watching scribes doing their mechanical movements faster, it was a
127.
by martin-t 7mo ago
A year later, do you see it now? I always say humans are not smart enough. First they came for the communists... You know the rest but how many of you would pick up a rifle and stand against evil? Well, first they came for the manual worker
128.
The future of Amazon coders is the present of Amazon warehouse workers(pluralistic.net)
59 points by martin-t 7mo ago|17 comments
129.
by martin-t 7mo ago
> it doesn't inherently entitle you to anything else besides the value of that first copy What if many people want to buy a copy but nobody wants to be the first because he'd pay the full cost and the others could get the next
130.
by martin-t 7mo ago
There are several subtypes of narcissism - overt (=grandiose), covert (=vulnerable), malignant, communal. (Some also use antagonistic as a further subtype of malignant.) Normally, they are considered separate categories. However, how I like
131.
by martin-t 7mo ago
That begs 2 questions: 1) Do they really? I honestly don't know, are there independent polls about this? 2) What makes them think they have any right to decide for other people's children? I would be OK with them genuinely thinkin
132.
by martin-t 7mo ago
Because people don't have real power, it's all indirect through politicians who are manipulated or paid by professionals. Democracy should be direct and the gating function shouldn't be age but a test of intelligence, logical
133.
by martin-t 7mo ago
That's what I've been thinking this whole time. If you wanna surveil your children, surveil your own fucking children. You have no say in other people's lives. Now, as for solutions, it's also simple but unpopular. Peopl
134.
by martin-t 7mo ago
> You don't believe that fair use is a moral issue? It's a moral issue, sure. That statement alone doesn't make it morally right/wrong and doesn't say anything about the extent of fair use. Why do you use words
135.
by martin-t 7mo ago
> that's fair use Please, understand that morality and legality are different concepts. I don't care about legality. It should codify morality but it doesn't I argue about morality. Legality should follow from that. >
136.
by martin-t 7mo ago
> You're making the implicit assumption that humans are special snowflakes and anything that we do cannot be replicated by computers Not at all, I see no reason a sufficiently complex algorithm could replicate or even surpass human
137.
by martin-t 7mo ago
It's great that LLMs helped you but do you recognize that they are trained on thousands, perhaps millions of lifetimes of human work without the consent of the original authors and often quite explicitly against their will and their ch
138.
by martin-t 8mo ago
I see this argument sometimes and it's annoying because: 1) People phrase it as a question even when they've already made up their mind (whether that's your case or not). 2) It implicitly assumes that humans and algorithms ar
139.
by martin-t 8mo ago
This is naive. Advertisement and network effects win. Individuals cannot compete with corporations on equal ground here.
140.
by martin-t 8mo ago
They might not care. Products win not by quality or features but by advertisement, hype and network effects. The original implementation would still have the upper hand here. OTOH if I as a nobody create something cool, there's nothing
141.
by martin-t 8mo ago
I've been thinking this for over two years, that's why I stopped contributing to open source at that time - my work was only gonna be exploited to make rich people richer regardless of the license. Crazy that only now we're s
142.
by martin-t 8mo ago
1) Legality and morality are obviously different and unrelated concepts. More people should understand that. 2) Copyright was the wrong mechanism to use for code from the start, LLMs just exposed the issue. The thing to protect shouldn&#x27
143.
by martin-t 8mo ago
Humans don't generate code, we write code. I am strongly opposed to anthropomorphising autocomplete (phrases like "I asked <my favorite LLM>", "<my LLM> suggested", ...) or even referring to autocomplete
144.
by martin-t 8mo ago
They define what's legal. States are the most prolific users of violence by far.
145.
by martin-t 8mo ago
This is what happens when a bunch of billionaires convince people autocomplete is AI. Don't get me wrong, it's very good autocomplete and if you run it in a loop with good tooling around it, you can get interesting, even useful re
146.
by martin-t 8mo ago
Humans are not smart enough. People are either proactive or reactive. Proactive think about the system and its incentives and how to align them for everyone's benefit. Reactive people only complain after they have been exploited. Most
147.
by martin-t 8mo ago
I started reading about the industrial revolutions and the evolution of capitalism recently. And it is my understanding that something similar was happening around the second industrial revolution - normal people barely making a living whil
148.
by martin-t 8mo ago
> Crime rates going down and down. This scares me. Humans are getting so domesticated and docile they might soon be content with being pets. I am not sure US independence or French revolution could happen today. I am obviously not a fan
149.
by martin-t 8mo ago
Status and control are a currency too. I worked on open source because I enjoyed the work and because it had control over the final result. Other people did it because of status it gave them in the community. There's plenty of people w
150.
by martin-t 8mo ago
> professional legislatures That should not be a profession. Decisions should be made by people who are the most informed about the subject matter. By definition you cannot have someone who is the most informed about everything.

More ›